“Fraudulent" is not a word used lightly in court... But that's how crucial expert evidence put to two juries in the conviction of Henry Keogh was described to the full bench of the Supreme Court today.
In something of a breakthrough, the court sat to consider if a second appeal in the case is now justified.
It's the first time, in almost twelve years, that a court has heard argument revealing that not only was most of the forensic evidence in the case based on faulty science and baseless assumptions... But that some of it didn't even exist.